British Broadcasting Corporation Gaza Documentary Ruled a 'Serious' Violation of Broadcasting Regulations, States Broadcasting Watchdog
The BBC was found to have committed a "significant breach" of media regulations by failing to disclose that the voice of a programme about the Gaza situation was the offspring of a Hamas representative, according to regulatory body Ofcom.
An investigation by the media regulator into the programme Gaza: How to Survive a Warzone has concluded that the programme was "materially misleading".
The chief executive of the broadcaster had already issued an apology, saying there had been "a major oversight in relation to accuracy".
The authority has directed the corporation to transmit a peak-time declaration about its findings.
"As this represents a significant violation of our regulations, we are ordering the broadcaster to transmit a message of our conclusions against it on the BBC's second channel at 9pm, with a date to be determined," it said.
'Possibility to Erode Confidence'
The watchdog's announcement said: "Our probe found that the documentary's lack of disclosure that the voice's parent held a post in the Hamas-run administration was significantly deceptive.
"Consequently that the public did not have essential details which may have been extremely pertinent to their judgment of the presenter and the content he provided.
"Credibility is at the core of the connection between a media organization and its viewers, notably for a public service broadcaster such as the public broadcaster.
"This oversight had the risk to erode the significantly high levels of trust that audiences would have placed in a documentary produced by the BBC about the Gaza conflict."
The programme was withdrawn from the online platform in the month of February after the presenter's personal associations emerged, and in the month of July an broadcaster's internal assessment found it infringed the corporation's editorial guidelines on factual correctness.
A BBC spokesperson said: "The regulator's decision is in agreement with the results of Peter Johnston's review, that there was a significant failing in the film in relation to the broadcaster's journalistic policies on factual correctness, which corresponds to Rule 2.2 of Ofcom's Broadcasting Code.
"We have apologised for this and we accept the authority's determination in its entirety. We will adhere to the sanction as soon as the date and language are finalised."
